Since you didn't showing it most logical competitor the GTX560 "non-ti", you miss the best comparison. Yes it's high, but finding this is the new reality of 28Nm parts, no cost saving to doing the shrink as TSMC pricing bump took that away. Then minimal if not actually shut-down fab by TSMC so not enough volume to help drive down demand. This is what we get and will be no different for Nvidia’s pricing structure. Thier competitive parts will in all probability MSRP at $200 like the GTX560 "non-ti" started at.
But I could be surprised....

Since you didn't showing it most logical competitor the GTX560 "non-ti", you miss the best comparison. Yes it's high, but finding this is the new reality of 28Nm parts, no cost saving to doing the shrink as TSMC pricing bump took that away. Then minimal if not actually shut-down fab by TSMC so not enough volume to help drive down demand. This is what we get and will be no different for Nvidia’s pricing structure. Thier competitive parts will in all probability MSRP at $200 like the GTX560 "non-ti" started at.
But I could be surprised....

Click to expand...

It is still priced too high relative to its performance I think.

Though of course the low power consumption, and quiet operation is probably whats going to sell it more, but you cant feel a bit cheated that it performs worse than their similarly priced previous generation.

I actually bought a MSi cyclone 6850 OC for $154.99. I had the choice between that and a 7770 for $169.99 and clearly it made no sense to pick the 7770 since the 6850 also has low power consumption and outperforms it in more games.

I think once the 7770 comes down back to earth maybe even at $149 will it actually be worth it.

It is very high on the performance per watt. When you consider it is roughly in the 460's performance range, that is pretty nice. Not extra power needed either. Sure it would be more competitive a little cheaper, but it does have some decent selling points.

How come the GPU voltage under 3D load in all your 7770 reviews is so low? I measured the voltage on 2 different 7770 cards (Sapphire and Powercolor), non-overclocked, 1000Mhz GPU clocks and it was ~0.8v. in idle and ~1.2v. under Unigine Heaven. Both cards were unstable even at 1.15v.

Though of course the low power consumption, and quiet operation is probably whats going to sell it more, but you cant feel a bit cheated that it performs worse than their similarly priced previous generation.

I actually bought a MSi cyclone 6850 OC for $154.99. I had the choice between that and a 7770 for $169.99 and clearly it made no sense to pick the 7770 since the 6850 also has low power consumption and outperforms it in more games.

I think once the 7770 comes down back to earth maybe even at $149 will it actually be worth it.

Click to expand...

I totally understand that at this starting price it seem strong, but it's unfair to consider to existing cards today when 5770/6850 MSRP at $160 and $240 respectively back in the day. You need to look at the current price on 6850/6870 are both from matured and long standing process. While it sure doesn't have any merit comparing to AMD's own products... they get the sale either way.

We know going to this 28Nm shrink didn't absolutely provide an improved per chip cost, the ability to provide ample production to AMD has been suspect, so AMD has to juggle the price against those aspects. Sure if they got the price improvement normally provide by previous possess shrinks, and knew positively that the process yields a production supply was going to be assured from day one they might have had a better feeling of being aggressive but that would be basically against themselves.

For the argument a 6850 ($135) is like 3% less Fps for 12% less money, while 6870 (don't see $155, more like $165-170) is 17% better Fps for 5% more dollars right today. W1zzard's chart has them as about 15% better $/Fps, that competing with themselve's. What's it matter AMD want to move 6870's it make sense!

Against Nvidia current offerings 550ti or GTX560 (non-Ti) it's not dire. Those MSRP started "theoretically" for $160/200; but that was for a reference models. We all know the chance of "reference" cards at those prices in the market at release was a near impossibility, a more normal starting prices was $170/220 respectively... although that means little in the present tense. Today the Nvidia "competition" is running closer to $110 for 550's and $175 for GTX560. A GTX560 which is something like 8-12% better performance than this OC’d 7770 at $160; so add 10% that's $176. Price to performance is not at all "out of line" with most GTX560 (non-Ti) deals. As for the 550 it's right at 22% less performance @1680x; so 22% off $160 is $125. That's a little better as about 30% less cash when playing $110. Although in the 7770 verse a GTX550ti, you're really jumping up in the "class" of cards, it's competitor is the 7750, which is priced aggressively. Looking at W1zzard's chart again has a 550 a 4% better proposition (but less of a card); while a GTX560 would appear maybe worse by 8% and why it's suspect to not include it.

Now, the last piece to this... What can/will Nvidia respond with? AMD has to figure what Nvidia's mainstream Kepler can bring. Will they get a smaller chip than GF116 or GF114 to cover these AMD offering, can Nvidia work a better per chip price, will they see any better yield production from their architecture, while will there be any great Fps bump over either the 550/560’s? Those are the real marketing factors/reasons for setting proper MSRP and a tough call months before the competition is in the picture.

I don't believe AMD set it too high... while as process and production (hopefully) is getting squared away at TMSC. That works in Nvidia's favor, coming late brings clarity to Nvidia setting of their pricing. So, before we say this is "bad" we need to see how Nvidia counters. If they have a 25% Fps increase, but sets an MSRP of $200... while then all you can get are OC’d factory specials for $225... will W1zzard say "Price too high to be competitive"? No now it's competitive to the comparable market offering and why it's not a "con" until we see Nvidia's prices. So we wait!

All of you miss the 5% gain from memory overclock. This card is bandwidth starved managing only a 8% increase in performance from a 10% increase in core speed.

Click to expand...

Now that's a valid point for a $160 card... vying a competitor like the GTX560(non-ti), and could have replace what W1zzard put!

Now if TSMC wasn't always such the disappointment... I mean they levy a 28Nm cost increase and then fail on the process/delivery. That's how TSMC "rewards" you for bring them the business first.
God where is G-F!

We all know this card could/should be seeing deals as low as $130, even quicker than the 6850 (with 256-bit bandwidth). 6850 had a starting MSRP @ $180 (Nov 2010), while by Sept 2011 could be picked-up for $120-130. Remember that was essentially because the GTX550ti 192-Bit (March 2011) was such the disappointment. Even after basically uplifting a GTS450 with bandwidth/clocks/price, and gussying it up by affixing it with GTX/Ti nomenclature it didn't help... AMD was so stunned just came back with the 6770 in 3 months (June 2011) with folks decry it as a rename?

So what will Nvidia offer be able to bring on cost effective 128-Bit entry level cards? 'coughgt440...cough' We wait!

Newegg has a Sapphire 7770 (11201-00-20G) at $150 –AR$10 w/FS and free copy of Dirt... today!